Uttam Raghunath Khot And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Ite Principal Secretary Department Of School Education And ORS
1 13 & 15 WP 178-24 & 181-24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 178 OF 2024 Uttam Raghunath Khot and Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
...Respondents
WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 181 OF 2024 SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Deepak Chandrakant Khade And Ors
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra And Ors
...Respondents
by SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Date: 2024.01.22 17:41:26 +0530 **** Mr. Chetan Patil for the Petitioners in both petitions. Mr. M.M. Pabale, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3/State in WP/ 178/2024.
Mr. V.M. Mali, AGP for Respondent/State in WP/181/2024. **** CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND M.M.SATHAYE, JJ.
DATE : 16 JANUARY 2024 P.C. :
.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2.
Petitioner No. 1 Employee, Petitioner No. 2 - Management and Petitioner No. 3 School in both petitions, are jointly challenging the Orders dated 14 November 2022 passed by same Respondent
2 13 & 15 WP 178-24 & 181-24.doc No. 3 / Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur. By the said impugned Orders, the approvals for appointment of the Petitioners as Peons are refused.
3.
It is submitted that, had an opportunity been given, the Petitioners would have given appropriate and necessary explanations to reasons of rejection.
4.
This is yet another matter, in which Education Officer has directly rejected the proposals, without informing proposed grounds of rejection. This has resulted in a situation where inquiry about the grounds of rejection are required to be done first time in this Court. 5.
In that view of the matter, we dispose of these petitions by directing that the impugned orders dated 14 November 2022 will be treated as notices to Petitioner Educational Institute of the proposed grounds of rejection. The Petitioners' proposals stand restored. If there are any other grounds on which the Education Officer intends to reject the proposals, he is directed to communicate the same to the Petitioner Educational Institute within a period of 3 weeks from today.
6.
The Educational Institute shall thereafter submit its explanation to the proposed grounds of rejection, along with supporting material, Government Resolutions, case laws / orders of this Court etc. if relied upon. The Respondent / Education Officer is
3 13 & 15 WP 178-24 & 181-24.doc directed to decide the proposals thereafter within a period of 8 weeks, by dealing with the explanation given by the Educational Institute as also dealing with case law/orders of this Court, by passing a reasoned order, subject to other time bound directions. 7.
We have not expressed any opinion on the Petitioners' proposals and the same shall be decided on its own merits in accordance with law. Needless to mention that if the Respondent/Education Officer proceeds to grant approvals, the aforesaid procedure/directions will not apply. 8.
The writ petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (M.M.SATHAYE, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)